Professional Indemnity FAQ

Joint Ventures and your Professional Indemnity

What is a joint venture? How does it affect my PI cover?

New firm formed to achieve specific objectives of a partnership like temporary arrangement between two or more firms. JVs are advantageous as a risk reducing mechanism in new-market penetration, and in pooling of resource for large projects. They, however, present unique problems in equity ownership, operational control, distribution of profits (or losses) and I'm afraid, when there is a professional indemnity claim. Research indicates that two out of five JV arrangements last less than four years, and are dissolved in acrimony.

From a Broker or Risk Management point of view, it is important to identify whether your clients are involved in joint ventures and if so declare them to their insurers. Some Insurers will cover automatically but most will not. Then if you do ask to include joint ventures you need to make sure it is clear that it is the Insured's own risk in the joint venture, or do you want to cover all the joint venture partners.

Depending on the nature of the JV, it is possible that insurers will cover all parties under one party's own Professional Indemnity, but in many cases insurers may refuse. It them means separate cover just for the joint venture, but the problem is that when the joint venture ends, they need to take out "run off" cover. Some insurers will do it as a single project cover, particularly where a Design and Construct type risk. If this is not possible, then multi-year "run off" cover can sometimes be bought but how long do you need it for?

My advice is all parties in a joint venture should cover their own risk and this should be a clearly stated intention in any JV agreement. Let the insurers sought out between them who is proportionally more to blame in the event of a claim, but most will be 50/50.

Latest News

D&O premium pool ‘must treble’ to return to profitability

A new report – called "Show Me The Money!" by insurer XL Catlin and law firm Wotton + Kearney – is the second in a series of three white papers on securities class actions and their impact on the Directors & Officers Liability (D&O) market. The main conclusion is that Directors’ and officers’ (D&O) insurance premiums are under-priced significantly and need to rise strongly to restore profitability. The main risk areas are those exposed to securities class actions, 

It says Directors & Officer's Side A, Side B and Side C cover has been chronically underpriced since at least 2011, while the frequency of class actions is increasing as more plaintiff lawyers and litigation funders enter the space.

The analysis suggests last year’s overall premium pool of about $210 million would need to increase by at least three times to establish a profitable market, if it is assumed all other factors stay unchanged.

“Recent market developments would indicate most D&O insurers are now endeavouring to restore some semblance of profitability to their portfolios after years of market losses,” the report says.

read more

75% of Cyclone Debbie claims settled

In the 6 months since Cyclone Debbie devastated Queensland and parts of northern New South Wales:

• more than 31,000 homes and business have been repaired or received settlements from their insurance company

• more than 20,000 families have had possessions replaced

• more than 4,500 motor vehicles have been repaired or new vehicles provided

• hundreds of local builders and trades have been working on properties to repair the damage and destruction caused by the cyclone

• over $5 million has been paid EACH DAY to assist local communities, residents and businesses.

read more